He begins his report by contrasting the population and commerce of Cuba with that of the Philippines; stating that Cuba, with less than a million of inhabitants, has a trade of 27,500,000 dollars, while the Philippines, which he says contained, in 1850, 4,000,000 of people in a state of subjection and 1,000,000 unsubdued, had a trade of less than 5,000,000 of dollars. He calculates the coloured population of Cuba at 500,000; the white population of the Philippines at from 7,000 to 8,000 persons. He deduces that, if the produce of the Philippines were proportioned to that of Cuba, it would be of the value of 250,000,000 dollars, and that the revenue should be 48,000,000 dollars, instead of about 9,500,000 dollars.
He avers that the soil is equal in its productive powers to any in the world; that the quality of the produce—sugar, coffee, tobacco, indigo, cocoa and cotton—is most excellent; that it possesses almost a monopoly of abacá (Manila hemp); and he goes on to consider the means of turning these natural advantages to the best account.
He altogether repudiates any extension of the existing system, or augmentation of taxation in its present forms; and states, what is most true, that to the development of agriculture, industry and commerce the Philippines must look for increased prosperity.
His three proposals are:—
1. Opening new ports to foreign trade.
2. Emancipating the production, manufacture and sale of tobacco.
3. Increasing the population of the islands.
By a royal decree, dated 31st March, 1855, three additional ports were opened to foreign trade—Zamboanga (Mindanao), Iloilo (Panay), and Sual (Luzon). The results have not responded to anticipations. One reason is obvious—custom-house officers, custom-house restrictions, custom-house vexations accompanied the seemingly liberal legislation. These are sufficient to check, if not to crush, the growth of intercourse. I doubt if in either of the new ports the custom-house receipts cover the costs of collection. The experiment should have been a free-trade experiment, but the jealousies and fears of the capital were probably influential. It ought not to have been forgotten that the new ports, charged with all the burdens which pressed upon Manila, offered none of its facilities, the creation of many generations—wharves and warehouses, accomplished merchants, capital, foreign settlers, assured consumption of imports and supply of exports; these counterbalanced the cost of conveyance of goods to or from the capital, while, on the other hand, the introduction of a custom-house has prejudiced the trade which previously existed—as, for example, the call of whalers at Zamboanga, unwilling to submit to the fiscal exactions now introduced. But if every port in the Philippines were made free from custom-houses a great impulse would be given to industry, commerce and shipping; the loss to the treasury would be inconsiderable, for the net proceeds of the customs duties is very insignificant, while other sources of revenue would be undoubtedly increased by the impulse given to the general prosperity. De Mas states that the extension of the trade of Cuba from the Havana to other ports led to an augmentation in its value from 2,000,000 to 30,000,000 dollars.
Two plans are suggested by Señor De Mas for the emancipation of the tobacco cultivation and manufacture from the existing State monopoly. One, the levying a heavy land tax on all lands devoted to the produce; the other, the imposition of a duty on exportation. He estimates that a baleta of land (1,000 brazas square) gives 1,500 plants, and 4 to 5 cwt. of tobacco, saleable at 4 to 5 dollars per quintal. The cost of manufacturing 14,000 cigars, which represent 1 cwt., 5¼ dollars, and boxes for packing, 3½ dollars. He says the value of the cigars is 6½ dollars per box (it is now considerably more), in which case the profit would be 77¼ dollars, and proposes a duty of 70 dollars per cwt., which is more than five times the cost of the article. He gives satisfactory reasons for the conclusion that cigars would be made much more economically by the peasantry than by the government, shows that the cost of the machinery of administration might be greatly diminished, asserts that the Indians employed at home would be satisfied with lower gains than the wages paid by the government, and supposes that the unoccupied houses of the natives would be dedicated to the making of cigars as a pleasant and profitable domestic employment. It may be doubted whether he estimates at its full value the resistance which the indolent habits of the Indian oppose to voluntary or spontaneous labour; but the conclusion I have reached by not exactly the same train of reasoning is the same as that arrived at by my friend whom I have been quoting, namely, that the government monopoly is less productive than free cultivation, manufacture and sale might become; that a reduction of prices would extend demand, leave larger benefits to the treasury and confer many advantages upon the people; and that the arguments (mostly of those interested in the monopoly) in favour of the existing system are not grounded on sound reasoning, nor supported by statistical facts.
The tobacco monopoly (estanco) was established in 1780 by Governor-General Basco; it was strongly opposed by the friars, and menaces of severe punishments were held over those who sought to escape the obligations imposed. But to the present hour there are said to be large plantations of tobacco which escape the vigilance of government, and cigars are purchaseable in many of the islands at one-fourth of the government price. The personal establishment for the protection of the tobacco monopoly consists of nearly a thousand officials and more than thirty revenue boats. It is, notwithstanding, cultivated largely in provinces where the cultivation is prohibited by law; and I find in a report from the Alcalde of Misamis (Mindanao) the following phrase: “The idea of interfering with the growth of tobacco for the benefit of the treasury must be abandoned, as the territory where it is produced is not subject to Spanish authority.”